2012 Thomson. This is an Open Access
article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons‐Attribution‐Noncommercial‐Share Alike License 2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ca/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial
purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the
same or similar license to this one.

Abstract

Objective – To
discover students’ perceptions of information commons staff, and to determine
how these perceptions influence the use of library resources.

Design – Post-experience
survey with one follow-up interview.

Setting – The
University of Sheffield, a post-secondary institution in England.

Subjects – All
undergraduate and postgraduate students were invited to take part. Just over 1%
of the student population, or 250 students, completed the survey.

Methods – Information
about the survey was sent to students’ institutional email addresses. One
follow up interview was carried out via email using the critical incident
technique.

Main Results –
Students
do not understand the academic roles of librarians. They are unlikely to
approach library staff for academic support, preferring to turn to instructors,
other students, friends, and family. Most students had positive opinions about
assistance received in the Information Commons, but a small number reflected on
previous bad experiences with staff, or on a fear of being made to feel
foolish. The vast majority of students who did not seek help in the Information
Commons stated that this was because they did not require assistance. Most
students do not perceive a difference between Information Commons staff and
library staff.

Conclusion – Students
have positive views of Information Commons staff at the University of
Sheffield, but have low awareness of the roles of professional librarians.
Librarians need to develop partnerships with academic staff and strengthen
their presence in both physical and online learning environments to promote
their academic roles.

Commentary

This
is a well-written paper reporting on findings that have serious implications
for professional librarians, especially those working in post-secondary
education.

Most
of the data for the paper was gathered via an online survey. Researchers used
email to contact university students since the survey was conducted during the
summer vacation. The paper does not explain the decision to implement the
survey when many students were away from the university, but the lead author
was undertaking a Master’s degree and is likely to have been restricted to this
time period due to the structure of her course. Just over 1% of potential
participants completed and submitted survey responses, a very small sample
size. This may result in sample bias, as students with strong opinions
(positive or negative) may have been more motivated to complete the survey.
Unfortunately the article does not include key details about the survey design
and methodology, e.g., whether reminder emails were sent to encourage
completion. Also, post-experience questionnaires can be problematic if there is
a time gap between the activity and the survey. In this study students were
asked about the previous academic year, and may have provided inaccurate data
about experiences from earlier months.

The
authors refer to a copy of the survey provided as an appendix (p. 229) but this
is missing from the e-journal. Therefore it is not possible to review the exact
wording used in the survey questions and it is unclear if students were asked
about online contact with the Information Commons, or only about physical
visits. Respondents did not correctly identify the activities carried out by
academic librarians, but there may have been confusion around the different job
titles of library employees: were job titles clarified in the survey design, or
did some participants think all university library employees were academic
librarians?

The
findings of the survey clearly demonstrate that university libraries are not
effectively communicating the roles of academic librarians. More than half of
the survey respondents did not know the identity of their academic librarian,
and many did not understand the academic support role of library staff. Though
researchers made attempts to arrange follow-up interviews with respondents,
only one interview was conducted, and this interview is not fully described in
the paper. Further interviews and alternative methods of gathering information,
such as focus groups, could prove helpful in future studies in this area.